logo
More Robots Will Fill Pharmacy Prescriptions at Walgreens

More Robots Will Fill Pharmacy Prescriptions at Walgreens

Entrepreneur12-05-2025

A robot, not a human pharmacist, may be filling your prescription at Walgreens. And there's about to be a lot more of them.
Walgreens told CNBC on Sunday that it wants to have more of its pharmacies send prescriptions to one of its 11 micro-fulfillment centers, or hubs that use robotic technology to fill patient prescriptions.
The goal is to have the facilities handle prescriptions for 5,000 pharmacies before the year ends, up from 4,800 stores in February and 4,300 stores in October 2023.
As of February, the centers took care of 40% of prescriptions for supported pharmacies, amounting to 16 million orders filled each month.
Related: Walgreens Boots Alliance Gets Bill for $2.7 Billion From the IRS After Tax Audit
The move to expand automation arrives as Walgreens readies itself to go private in a $10 billion deal. The drugstore chain announced in March that it had agreed to be acquired by private equity firm Sycamore Partners, with the deal expected to close in the fourth quarter of the year.
How does a micro-fulfillment center work?
When a Walgreens pharmacy supported by a center receives a prescription order, the system decides if it should be filled by pharmacists at that location or sent to the center. The decision often comes down to timeliness: Centers usually handle refills that don't require immediate pickup.
The facilities then use robots, conveyor belts, and scanners to fill prescriptions accurately. While pharmacists fill prescriptions by hand at stores, robots dispense prescriptions down a carefully managed assembly line at centers.
There is still some human involvement at the facilities, though. A team of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians works behind the scenes at the centers to ensure that the right pills reach the correct bottles.
Related: This Walgreens Product Is Flying Off Shelves, Thanks to TikTok: 'We Sold Through Nearly All of the Product'
Robotic centers drive cost savings for Walgreens
The micro-fulfillment facilities have had a noticeable impact on Walgreens since the first one opened in early 2021. Kayla Heffington, Walgreens' pharmacy vice president, told CNBC that the centers have helped Walgreens save $500 million to date and allowed its pharmacists to spend more time with patients. She said that the centers allowed Walgreens to improve prescription volume by 126% year-over-year, while simultaneously bringing down costs by close to 13%.
Walgreens is now filling more than 170 million prescriptions per year, with the goal of raising that total to 180 million or higher with the help of the centers, she stated.
Rick Gates, Walgreens' chief pharmacy officer, added that the centers give Walgreens "a lot more flexibility to bring down costs."
"Right now, they're the backbone to really help us offset some of the workload in our stores," Gates told CNBC.
He noted that the facilities give Walgreens an advantage over independent pharmacies and other rivals that lack robotic prescription fulfillment.
Related: 'Changes Are Imminent': Walgreens to Shutter a 'Significant' Number of Stores
Amazon Pharmacy has its own automated pharmacy fulfillment centers that aim to bring medications to customers in two days or less on average.
Companies like Walmart, Kroger, and Albertsons each have micro-fulfillment centers that process items like groceries, but none have publicly disclosed prescription fulfillment centers.
CVS has also implemented automation in its supply chain, though not publicly for its pharmacies. At CVS's Lumberton, New Jersey, distribution center, 152 robots work together to process 1.9 million products per week.
Walgreens was the second biggest pharmacy in the U.S. by prescription drugs market share in 2024, right after CVS.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Marjorie Taylor Greene sounds alarm over AI provision in One Big Beautiful Bill Act: 'I would have voted NO if I had known'
Marjorie Taylor Greene sounds alarm over AI provision in One Big Beautiful Bill Act: 'I would have voted NO if I had known'

Fox News

time16 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Marjorie Taylor Greene sounds alarm over AI provision in One Big Beautiful Bill Act: 'I would have voted NO if I had known'

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who voted to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in the House last month, slammed a provision of the proposal on Tuesday, noting that if she had realized it was in the measure, she would have voted against passage. The provision Greene is sounding the alarm about would significantly restrict states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade. "Except as provided in paragraph (2), no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce, during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, any law or regulation of that State or a political subdivision thereof limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce," the provision reads, in part. Greene disclosed in a post on X that she did not know about that provision of the proposal when she voted to pass the measure last month. "Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there," she noted in the tweet on Tuesday. "We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous. This needs to be stripped out in the Senate. When the OBBB comes back to the House for approval after Senate changes, I will not vote for it with this in it. We should be reducing federal power and preserving state power. Not the other way around. Especially with rapidly developing AI that even the experts warn they have no idea what it may be capable of," Greene added. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., responded to Greene's post by tweeting, "You have one job. To. Read. The. F[---]ing. Bill." "Maybe instead of doing this you should have read the bill," conservative commentator Dana Loesch tweeted in response to Greene's comments. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act runs a bit more than 1,000 pages long. Greene told Fox News Digital during a phone call on Wednesday that if she ever ceases to be "humble as a representative and willing to publicly admit that maybe I've made a mistake … then I shouldn't be a representative." But the congresswoman explained that she believes that "this is a far more important discussion than Marjorie admitted that she missed reading a little clause" lodged within the lengthy bill. Greene said that she believes she should have "been able to trust Republicans, that we wouldn't be destroying federalism in the One Big Beautiful Bill. That was what I didn't expect. Because, state rights, that's federalism. And Republicans are focused on reducing federal government power and protecting state rights. However, this bill literally destroys state rights for 10 years … destroys federalism." She said that regardless of which party is "in charge … this is something that we just can't allow to happen." On Tuesday, business tycoon Elon Musk blasted both the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the lawmakers who voted to pass it. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it," he tweeted.

Former Trump NASA Nominee Suggests Ties to Musk Caused His Ouster
Former Trump NASA Nominee Suggests Ties to Musk Caused His Ouster

Bloomberg

time20 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Former Trump NASA Nominee Suggests Ties to Musk Caused His Ouster

By and Loren Grush Updated on Save Financial technology billionaire Jared Isaacman appeared to suggest President Donald Trump withdrew his nomination to run NASA due to his close ties to Elon Musk amid the SpaceX chief executive officer's falling out in Washington. 'There was obviously more than one departure that was covered on that day,' Isaacman said on an episode of the All-In Podcast released on Wednesday. 'There were some people that had some axes to grind, I guess, and I was a good visible target.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store